4 ms·
The people who tend to make that argument are people who will eventually hand-wave away all efforts at electrifying society and transportation, minimize climate
by unethical_ban 5y ago
The people who tend to make that argument are people who will eventually hand-wave away all efforts at electrifying society and transportation, minimize climate change and the efforts to stop it, and so on.
Yes, there are up-front environmental costs to electric cars, but I wager it's worth it.
Scenario: We could churn out 50,000,000 electric cars next year, with all the strip mining and oil-burning required. But somehow, we had nuclear/solar energy and a grid in the US capable of supporting the power draw. The outcome would be a much healthier country, on the whole.
The goal long term is to eliminate the use of fossil fuels. Transport is the most obvious "hard" problem - nuclear/solar/wind are clearly going to take over coal and gas. It would be beneficial to move transport over to electric now, to "centralize" the fossil fuel problem to power plants.
- 0des 5y ago> The people who tend to make that argument are people who will eventually hand-wave away all efforts at electrifying society and transportation, minimize climate change and the efforts to stop it, and so on This is not being fair or charitable. Some people are genuinely curious, like myself, but are treated as if some type of malice was intended just for asking.
- unethical_ban 5y agoYou asked for context. Experience is experience. I didn't say you were like that, and I answered the question assuming you in particular were asking in good faith.
- pomian 5y agoInteresting to look up Underground mining. Could try CIM. most underground mines have been using electrically powered machines for years. Some Decades. Air quality underground is big concern.
- hilyen 5y agojust for clarity, i am a leftist. i just call bs when i see it.
- unethical_ban 5y agoSame here.